ihatemusic

I've been trying to get a better grasp of this genre and the terms associated with it. Hopefully, what I get out of this thread are some definitive sources that tell me:

- Whether "Berlin Reductionism" only refers to a certain scene or the international trend towards quieter dynamics and silence in New Music.

- If the former, whether "Reductionism" is synonymous with "Berlin Reductionism," or refers to the international trend towards quieter dynamics and silence in New Music.

- If the former, what term might be used to describe the international trend towards quieter dynamics, etc.

- Assuming "Reductionism" is such a term, if it refers to both the improvised and composed streams of quiet New Music.

- What specific terms might distinguish the improvised and composed streams.

- What "New London Silence" is.

- What the relationship between Reductionism, Lowercase, Onkyo, New London Silence is. For instance, are the latter three subcategories of the former?

- What other terms might be useful to know.

- The names of influential, important, or early artists in each of these categories.

- Something interesting.

- Artists and albums that I should check out.

- If there are any more crossovers with "song" similar to Sugimoto's Songs + the Saritote series, Akiyama/Unami/Kamura's Hontatedori, David Sylvian's Manafon, Kahimi Karie's Nunki, and Pisaro's Tombstones.

Thanks in advance.

hi. are you real? such a list of questions is not especially inviting (with its mix of very specific terms and a very general plea for recommendations), the search function would help you on a lot of those ... in case you are in fact real, for the last question check dean roberts/autistic daughters.

I may or may not be real, but I am serious. Disclaimer: I'm not looking for one person, article, etc. to answer it all, btw. Also, the last three bullets are not the point of the thread. I mainly just want to work out what the terms mean and the relationship to one another.

I've searched the forum a bit already, still working through some of those threads but I don't think these questions have been asked as straightforwardly, so the answers to my questions might prove a bit hard to find just in a forum search.

I would say no one really used those terms so seriously at the time, the Wire was the only place I ever saw 'New London Silence' and Berliners preferred Echtzeitmusik.

also the two ErstPops for the last question.

jon abbey wrote:I would say no one really used those terms so seriously at the time, the Wire was the only place I ever saw 'New London Silence' and Berliners preferred Echtzeitmusik.

also the two ErstPops for the last question.

Is "reductionism" itself included in that as well?

it's too bad that the Jazz Corner archives are off the web (maybe in the Wayback machine?) as we had endless discussions about genre names there. basically genre names are a necessary evil, but they tend to 1) mark the beginning of the end of creativity in an area and 2) push people into talking about the names and what is and isn't included under that umbrella, and not the music.

reductionism is not a term I ever remember using much myself or coming across much, I do think it's an ok umbrella genre term if you think of it in terms of a cooking reduction, boiling something down for more intense results.

the genre terms most used back then were EAI and the one I preferred, taomud (shorthand for 'the area of music under discussion'), but talking about specific musicians/groups/combos/records is almost always more interesting and satisfying IMO.

Most of the energy has moved to "redactionism" these days.

https://weneednoswords.wordpress.com/tag/redactionism/

jon abbey wrote:it's too bad that the Jazz Corner archives are off the web (maybe in the Wayback machine?) as we had endless discussions about genre names there. basically genre names are a necessary evil, but they tend to 1) mark the beginning of the end of creativity in an area and 2) push people into talking about the names and what is and isn't included under that umbrella, and not the music.

reductionism is not a term I ever remember using much myself or coming across much, I do think it's an ok umbrella genre term if you think of it in terms of a cooking reduction, boiling something down for more intense results.

the genre terms most used back then were EAI and the one I preferred, taomud (shorthand for 'the area of music under discussion'), but talking about specific musicians/groups/combos/records is almost always more interesting and satisfying IMO.

Yeah, fair enough. One benefit of genre names is that it gives the music to which the name is applied more visibility. Just by searching Echtzeitmusik, a term I only just learned in this thread, I've found many artists I might not have otherwise found (or would have taken me longer to find) had I not known the term. Perhaps the musicians don't care much about visibility, but it appeals to me as a listener and seeker of this sort of music. Labels and scenes are good, too, in this regard.

I mean, it's my label, but I've been working in this area for almost 20 years now, over 100 releases and over 100 musicians, and there is something from every release free to stream on Bandcamp:

https://erstwhilerecords.bandcamp.com

also I have a running list of my own personal choices (including lots of Ersts) year by year, through 2016, this might help you also:

https://erstwhilerecords.blogspot.com/2 ... rimer.html

I do follow Erstwhile, but didn't know about the blog. Thanks for that.

reductionism sounds best for the story of radu malfatti (who reduced from efi). i wonder if the term makes even less sense today than it did then, since the silence thing is still very much an alive tradition and has grown both new roots and branches (a bit boringly, things seem to look more cagey again).

I have been reading and digging around a bit, and, according to Mark Wastell, "New London Silence" and "Berlin Reductionism" were coined to bill a tour involving both the London and Berlin scenes.

"Reductionism" seems to be used mostly for the improvised side of things, but also, occasionally, when talking about Radu's progression and joining Wandelweiser folks, as Wombatz mentioned.

It seems part of the reason why "New London Silence" and "Berlin Reductionism" and even "Onkyo" are being eschewed is because the musicians are sort of moving on from the reductionist aesthetic into something different. It's been around 25 years after all since these scenes first cropped up.

I don't know if this helps:

Peter Niklas WIlson - Reduktion: Zur Aktualität einer musikalischen Strategie (2003, book in german lanuage)

I had it, read it, can't find it, maybe gave it away again (mostly because I don't find its topic very interesting after all).
No idea what the afficinados think of that particular book, but in general I find Wilson really worth reading.

I received the new Sven-Ake Johansson DVD the other day. There's short concert segments and a few interview statements with/of Berlin people often associated with that field (though the music I heard there wasn't particularly reduced at all). Anyway Andrea Neumann says something, so does Burkhard Beins + Axel Dörner, among others. Again in german.

Polymorphia wrote:It seems part of the reason why "New London Silence" and "Berlin Reductionism" and even "Onkyo" are being eschewed is because the musicians are sort of moving on from the reductionist aesthetic into something different. It's been around 25 years after all since these scenes first cropped up.

but also as I said, pretty much no one ever used those terms, even at the time.

Don't forget The New Rutland Silence.

Alastair wrote:Don't forget The New Rutland Silence.

ha! splitter!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS-0Az7dgRY

jon abbey wrote:I do think it's an ok umbrella genre term if you think of it in terms of a cooking reduction, boiling something down for more intense results.

(veering off-topic, but...) my objection to this kind of characterization is it's a sort of generalist claim that pretty much anyone involved in any creative pursuit would claim. It's related to the other claim that kind of crops up in this context, that the special characteristic of this area of music is "carefully choosing each note" or "dispensing with unnecessary notes" (or whatever, paraphrasing). Who wouldn't claim that for their own music? I suspect even maximalists like Cecil Taylor or Peter Brötzmann would strenuously object to any implication that they aren't choosing to play what they play very carefully for maximum effect or intensity, or that their music contains any unnecessary notes.

Anyway, to the OP, you might be interested in a film documentary on the Berlin improvised music scene:

https://www.weltfilm.com/en/films/all-f ... rovisation


Looking back over a decade, I remember when threads first started popping up on IHM about "the death of EAI" or EAI having exhausted itself or whatever that somebody made the astute comment that "EAI" was a confluence or weighted average of different intersecting areas of music, and that those different intersecting lines have now gone on to different places. I think that sort of nails it. Two of those intersecting lines were the trend towards a "silent" aesthetic in improvised music, and the increased use of electronics in improvised music at the turn of the millenium. In retrospect, they were part of that assemblage of intersecting milieus, rather than a definable coherent milieu (I still don't think the MEGO branch of maximalist electronics really has much to do with the aesthetic of somebody like Malfatti).

"Reductionism" makes sense if you dispense with the idea of necessity. The musicians are reducing, but not to anything that is necessary as it is not necessary to play anything. Further, I think maximalist and minimalist approaches to improvisation involve, respectively, larger and smaller grains of sound. For instance, Coltrane's "sheet of sound." It isn't always important to premeditate or meditate every note that breaches silence in a sheet of sound, but simply to breach silence. So, in a big way, maximalist aren't necessarily "carefully choosing each note" because the notes aren't necessarily always the most important unit in their work. Where as the more minimalistic approach conceptualized silence in a particular way such as to deal with the smallest grains of sound that they can process.

1. Nobody but some dumb journalists used the term. I understand why they did it, though.

2. Around the same time, trends towards quieter music were happening simultaneously (more or less) in several key places: Berlin (echtzeitmusik--they have a whole book about it), Japan (onkyo/off-site--mainly b/c the space was small and had thin walls and neighbors), East-coast US (Kelley/Rainey/Coleman/Gross/Bullock, et al.), and London (I don't know much about what they were up to). That time was a long time ago, though, and sorta old news, and the vast majority of the people involved also played/play louder music, often with no distinction between "styles" (ugh)).

3. Is this some sort of homework assignment/research project for school?

faster wrote:Nobody but some dumb journalists used the term.

I suppose I stand accused But don't think all musicians were unhappy with the term - Phil Durrant for one wasn't, and I wouldn't call him dumb.
A few oldies (but goodies) for your thesis
http://www.paristransatlantic.com/magaz ... nzler.html
http://www.paristransatlantic.com/magaz ... unter.html (He rather liked "lowercase")
http://www.paristransatlantic.com/magaz ... fatti.html
http://www.paristransatlantic.com/magaz ... stell.html